oh Fred..Injuneer....say it aint' so broh

[wolfdogs]

after all the bashing and smashing wev'e done over the years..........

low and behold........

John Bellah, a writer for Police Fleet Manager Magazine just published this article in the July-Aughst 2004 Vol. 3, No. 4 issue:

"Tornado Air Management System":

to sum it up...."A 1998 Ford Crown Vic Police Interceptor (CVPI) was fitted with a third generation Tornado (V3) and given to ECOlogic Engine Testing Laboratories in Fullerton, CA. Running the stock car through the test cycle without the Tornado gave a baseline figure of 15.91 mpg. The mileage after installing the Tornado V3 increased the mileage to 19.77 mpg.

The CVPI was placed on a Dynojet Model 248C Chassis Dyno at Harv's Performance Center in Whittier, CA. AFter conducting several baseline runs without the device, installation of the Tornado V3 brought a 4 to 7 horsepower increase and an average of 10 pounds-feet increase in torque AT the rear wheels........ The graph showed the greatest hp increase was in the 20-30mph range, while the greatest torque increase was in the 50-60 mph range.

Determination: the Tornado produced more efficient combustion."

They tested it on a 2001 Impala and a 2003 CVPI but got much less improvements........

They believe that placing the unit as close to the throttle vlave as possible wil generate the best results, regardless of the Tornado's installation instructions for that particular vehicle..............

[Fastbird93]

Wow. That was printed in the Onion or whatever it's called, right??

[Dave M]

Ken, I know you are disbelieving and we've laughed at these devices for years, but if they have the actual measured test results to prove it, what's not to believe?

[wolfdogs]

Ken, I know you are disbelieving and we've laughed at these devices for years, but if they have the actual measured test results to prove it, what's not to believe?

well...see... i started my Govt career in 1975 when i came from GM. i was hired when the first formed the Automotive Commodity Center. one of my jobs was working with EPA to evaluate all these "new and improved" devices that were flooding the market place to "save fuel"..."increas horses"..yada yada. we went thru hundreds of them... proving all but one a hoax... and that one, developed by Norm Halem... called the "pass master cut out"... worked..and gm bought him out... its now called the 'thermo limiter'.. its the device that cuts off the ac compressor when you floor it........

anyway.......... alot of items submitted were very simular to the tornado... only back then....we used carbs......

if a device has a enough merit... one of the big three will buy the patent from the inventors... they can get rich quick and invest thier money....and not have to go on doing infomercials and such.

if you look at the whole article.... the CVPI, 1998...was the most gain. the IMpala only gained .1 mpg... the 2003 cvpi .3 mpg.............. now................ that aint worth writting home about......is it ?

[Dave M]

Ken, I agree that the tornado isn't worth much, especially in most vehicles. The intakes are all designed differently, but what if something about the Crown Vic's intake design makes it receptive to the tornado? Obviously in most cases the thing won't help you, but apparently if you own a Crown Vic their claims may hold true, unless they had equipment problems that registered those gains.

[MN6WS6]

I believe what Ken's actual argument is, is that you could spend the same money and make your own cold air intake and gain more HP,torque, and mileage without using a piece of aluminum foil cut to look like a turbine wheel

That article only shows me that Ford had their head up their butt in 98 and designed an intake for the later models that is more efficient, hence the lack of improvement with the newer car. Somebody needs to investigate that and see if Ford did change the intake.

[Mirroredshades]

Maybe they need to test the merits of muffler bearings too.....

[Rhode Island Red]

Funny thing is that this test was done on a specific vehicle .. outside the normal installation procedures ... If they truely want the test to have merit, this test should have been on multiple platforms and multiple vehicles form each platform

who is to say that car was put together differently (engine tolerances and such from the factory) so as that it allowed maximum increase or that it allowed the minimun increase

I am not taking that test with a grain of salt...despite it from a respected lab

[wolfdogs]

Funny thing is that this test was done on a specific vehicle .. outside the normal installation procedures ... If they truely want the test to have merit, this test should have been on multiple platforms and multiple vehicles form each platform

who is to say that car was put together differently (engine tolerances and such from the factory) so as that it allowed maximum increase or that it allowed the minimun increase

I am not taking that test with a grain of salt...despite it from a respected lab

like i said.. for the little gains in the 200+ models they tested.....for 70.00...its a rip off waste...

[Dave M]

Funny thing is that this test was done on a specific vehicle .. outside the normal installation procedures ... If they truely want the test to have merit, this test should have been on multiple platforms and multiple vehicles form each platform

who is to say that car was put together differently (engine tolerances and such from the factory) so as that it allowed maximum increase or that it allowed the minimun increase

I am not taking that test with a grain of salt...despite it from a respected lab

They only tested it on specific vehicles because it was a police agency doing the testing. They tested it on the most widely used police cars... Crown Vic Police Interceptor (CVPI) being one. It is interesting to note the 03 model didn't gain as much, and Ford did do some redesign to the engine in the 99 CVPI, so they may very well have negated any effect of the tornado by making a quality design in the first place.

[Injuneer]

Without seeing and checking the actual test results, these reports are meaningless. Every one of these tests I have ever seen has some sort of obfuscation that leaves the conclusions open to interpretation.

I don't know what the intake manifold and TB for a Crown Vic looks like. I do know what an LT1 intake looks like, and there is absolutely no conceivable rationale for spinning the air charge in front of the TB to do anything in the way of More efficient combustion.

Also sort of interesting that the "current issue" of the magazine, as listed on their website is May-June 2004, so I can't even peek at the article.

[Joe 1320]

[QUOTE=Injuneer]

I don't know what the intake manifold and TB for a Crown Vic looks like. I do know what an LT1 intake looks like, and there is absolutely no conceivable rationale for spinning the air charge in front of the TB to do anything in the way of More efficient combustion.

[QUOTE]

Or just as bad....... placing it in front of the MAF where the now turbulent air is straightened out by the MAF screens.

[wolfdogs]

we having fun yet?